Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla Energy

teslamotors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 590 posts

Re: Tesla Energy

#331

Post by ams6110 »

sfrigon wrote: post #312
je_bailey wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed an additional subset of users. I live in an old neighborhood that experiences power outages and fluctuations once or twice a year. This is fantastic and something I will be installing as soon as I can. So older neighborhoods, rural areas with inconsistent power supply. All of these potentially benefit from this.

Living in a region with cold weather, this is the kind of situation I would like to solve too. The problem is that a generator still has benefits over a battery, it can be refilled (i.e. when you lose electricity for a longer period).

And is a fraction of the cost, best case, or about the same if you want one capable of powering your entire household load indefinitely. And if you have natural gas service, you don't need to refuel either.

Re: Tesla Energy

#332

Post by hyperpape »

eli wrote: post #284
ZoFreX wrote: post #261

This is a three-pronged stroke of genius: 1) Immediate benefits to just about anyone. If you have your own solar panels, you need this (or something like it). Even if you don't, you can benefit by drawing more power during cheaper off-peak times. 2) If lots of people get in on this, we'll have the storage capacity we need on the grid to be more dependent on renewable energy. Lack of storage capacity is one of the big…

> power during cheaper off-peak times Pretty sure my rate is the same all the time. I wonder what percentage of electricity customers have variable rate pricing.

One point is that if batteries in houses (or electric cars) become more common, there's more incentive for a utility to offer variable pricing, because more people can actually make use of it, letting the utility company get by with less peak capacity.

Re: Tesla Energy

#333

Post by tokenadult »

freehunter wrote: post #325
tokenadult wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Less funny when you consider that the Tesla press release submitted here for discussion says, "The Powerwall consists of Tesla’s lithium-ion battery pack, liquid thermal control system and software that receives dispatch commands from a solar inverter." The inverter, of course, converts battery DC current to household AC current so that people can continue to enjoy AC power in their homes. http://electronics.howstuff…

Well obviously. Everything runs off AC, no one would buy this battery pack if it didn't have an inverter.

That didn't look at all obvious when I replied above, because I was replying to a comment that said, in so many words, "Funny that something called Tesla Energy brings back direct current to the home." No, Tesla Energy is not bringing back direct current to the home. It is providing battery backup for continuing provision of alternating current to the home, which is strictly necessary in a world of appliances that run on AC current. I took the trouble to read the fine article before replying the first time, after first reading the previously posted comments.

(My late dad was an industrial engineer for a company that manufactured electric generators, so this issue immediately jumped into my mind when I saw the comment I replied to. The difference between AC power and DC power was dinner-table conversation in my home when I was growing up.) Does anyone think that my comment above was in any way harmful to the community or to the discussion here?

Re: Tesla Energy

#334

Post by gus_massa »

sfrigon wrote: post #312
je_bailey wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed an additional subset of users. I live in an old neighborhood that experiences power outages and fluctuations once or twice a year. This is fantastic and something I will be installing as soon as I can. So older neighborhoods, rural areas with inconsistent power supply. All of these potentially benefit from this.

Living in a region with cold weather, this is the kind of situation I would like to solve too. The problem is that a generator still has benefits over a battery, it can be refilled (i.e. when you lose electricity for a longer period).

I agree, but I guess that the generator have a no zero starting time. (Do you have o turn it on manually?) So the battery keeps the electricity for the meanwhile.

Also, the generators are noisier. Perhaps you can turn them off during the night and use only the battery while you are sleeping and the electricity consumption is smaller.

Re: Tesla Energy

#335

Post by criley2 »

psychometry wrote: post #291
watty wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how it's immediately beneficial for just about everyone. I currently have a flat rate for kWh and no solar panel... and moving soon. It's not worth the $. In 6 months I'll be renting for a year, still not beneficial. Perhaps in a couple years I can purchase solar, a battery, and an energy system that can automate some demand shedding but we're talking about 1%ers here. In fact, I'd say it's only immediate…

As someone who rents an apartment with no garage and has a traditional gas-powered car, I can echo your sentiment and claim that Tesla has had zero impact on my life and that this announcement doesn't change that. I sincerely hope that Tesla's many innovative business efforts improve society in some major way, but right now they're still just a high-end automative company that's exploring the renewable energy space.…

>" but it's not like Elon Musk has saved the world just yet."

"I choose to rent, I choose to have no property rights over the building I live in, I choose to be legally incapable of installing solar panels and batteries on a structure I don't own: Elon Musk has failed me"

Come on now. You made your choice to not be a part of the greater community and culture of property owners.

These options, they're available to owners, not renters.

Did you realize Google Fiber was the same way? As a renter, you have 0 ability to install Google Fiber without your owners permission. (https://support.google.com/fiber/answer/2847916?hl=en)

This is the same.

If you care, you'll petition your landlord to invest in these technologies. Or you'll buy property and change your status to enable yourself materially and legally to be able to do it yourself.

But you can't blame Elon because of your choice to make yourself willingly devoid of the legal authority to make these decisions for yourself.

Elon can never overcome your landlords property rights. Not now, not in 100 years. That's not his failure, it's your choice in a free society. Next time, rent in a location that has these options already installed, or make it known that these are your priorities. I personally have sat down with my landlord and discussed Fiber and the costs and the benefits, and I'm confident he will make that investment on behalf his property. It's not hard to take the initiative and make a case.

Re: Tesla Energy

#336

Post by checker »

agmcleod wrote: post #303
psychometry wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who rents an apartment with no garage and has a traditional gas-powered car, I can echo your sentiment and claim that Tesla has had zero impact on my life and that this announcement doesn't change that. I sincerely hope that Tesla's many innovative business efforts improve society in some major way, but right now they're still just a high-end automative company that's exploring the renewable energy space.…

Agreed. I'd love to have a living situation where a tesla or electric vehicle was realistic for me. They're just better pieces of engineering. But sadly due to renting an apartment, parking underground, and so forth, it's not a life style I can change to.

Not trying to sound snarky, but how does parking underground preclude you from owning an electric vehicle? Is there a physical reason for this? There are apartments that have electric vehicle chargers. You might even be able to convince your complex to install a few as an amenity that will make it more attractive to new tenants.

Re: Tesla Energy

#337

Post by ams6110 »

ZoFreX wrote: post #261

This is a three-pronged stroke of genius: 1) Immediate benefits to just about anyone. If you have your own solar panels, you need this (or something like it). Even if you don't, you can benefit by drawing more power during cheaper off-peak times. 2) If lots of people get in on this, we'll have the storage capacity we need on the grid to be more dependent on renewable energy. Lack of storage capacity is one of the big…

It's a good idea; I would place it more in the "obvious" category than "stroke of genius" but it's clearly got a market.

I think that the technology to do (2) at grid scale is far from ready. The grid was built to distribute power from generating stations out to users. It was not designed to have power flowing into it from thousands of dispersed battery packs at the tips of the network (i.e. residential service points). Significant reengineering and investement will be needed to make this really workable.

Re: Tesla Energy

#338

Post by fredkbloggs »

Yaggo wrote: post #83
vanadium wrote: post #17

$3,500. That's crazy good for your average household, on par with natural gas backup generators with half the logistics. I might just be ordering sooner rather than later given some of the grid instabilities in my area over the past year, and through the mid-term in preparation for a solar switch here in Chicago. While Elon might not be the best orator, you can easily derive his authenticity and belief in the product…

That's crazy cheap. The closest competitor which comes into my mind is probably SMA Sunny Boy Smart inverter with lithium battery, costing more than double while offering only 2 kWh of energy (but includes a solar inverter).

It's not crazy cheap at all. The incumbent technology here is flooded lead-acid, a proven solution used everywhere from telco COs to forklifts to off-grid cabins for over a century. Industrial FLA batteries (the top grade, longest-lasting, etc.) retail for somewhere around $250 per kWh, and typically have warranties ranging from 7 to 10 years. We don't know exactly what the differences are between Tesla's two offerings, but even if we assume that the 10 kWh model is rated for continuous deep cycling for 10 years (their language suggests it may not be), we would still have to justify the $350 per kWh price tag. The other model comes in at $428. So this is somewhere around 50% more costly than existing solutions with a similar expected life span. The limitation of 2 kW continuous power is also a major drawback relative to FLA solutions, which can typically provide at least 200 A (around 10 kW at 48V, much more at the higher voltages the Tesla unit operates at). Since the Li-ion battery is maintenance-free, a better comparison might be AGM or other VRLA technologies, which are slightly more expensive than FLA, but still less expensive than the Tesla units.

Since no inverter, grid-tie transfer relay, or charge controllers are included in this unit, those will all be additional costs just as they would with any other batteries. And it appears you will be limited to a few inverters and probably a micro-inverter PV design; this is purely a grid-tie-only design. Existing battery technologies can do all of that, but they also give you much broader flexibility for other applications and system designs.

I'm not sure why I would want this. I'd be paying above the odds for some serious design constraints and limitations I wouldn't otherwise have. Tesla seem to be taking a very different approach from their launch of the Roadster, which was a super-premium offering at a super-premium price. This is a modest offering at a premium price in relative terms, but low enough in absolute terms to appeal to people who aren't well-versed in the field. Their success will probably depend on installers deciding it's easier to just take people's money and sell them the Tesla than to educate their customers and give them the best value available. Not a bad gamble, for Tesla.

Re: Tesla Energy

#339

Post by checker »

psychometry wrote: post #291
watty wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how it's immediately beneficial for just about everyone. I currently have a flat rate for kWh and no solar panel... and moving soon. It's not worth the $. In 6 months I'll be renting for a year, still not beneficial. Perhaps in a couple years I can purchase solar, a battery, and an energy system that can automate some demand shedding but we're talking about 1%ers here. In fact, I'd say it's only immediate…

As someone who rents an apartment with no garage and has a traditional gas-powered car, I can echo your sentiment and claim that Tesla has had zero impact on my life and that this announcement doesn't change that. I sincerely hope that Tesla's many innovative business efforts improve society in some major way, but right now they're still just a high-end automative company that's exploring the renewable energy space.…

As someone who just started walking to work, I can't wait for the day that the smelly fumes of gasoline exhaust disappear from our streets. And Tesla, among others, is bringing us closer to that day.
Post reply on HN